User talk:Reithan/Archive 2
NPA is bad. Don't do it. --[[User:Edru_viransu|'Edru viransu']]//[[User_talk:Edru_viransu|'QQ about me']]/sysop 21:51, 7 October 2007 (CEST) :Waht is NPA? — ( \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 21:52, 7 October 2007 (CEST) ::PvX:NPA --[[User:Edru_viransu|'Edru viransu']]//[[User_talk:Edru_viransu|'QQ about me']]/sysop 21:54, 7 October 2007 (CEST) :::It's not a personal attack. I didn't say HE had no skill. I said that IF you don't have the skill required for the build it won't work. I also said his alternate suggested build was a farce. No personal attack detected. — ( \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 21:56, 7 October 2007 (CEST) ::::How are neither of these, "In any case these build fly completely over your head and it shows" and "If you don't have the skill to use it effectively", personal attacks? --[[User:Edru_viransu|'Edru viransu']]//[[User_talk:Edru_viransu|'QQ about me']]/sysop 21:59, 7 October 2007 (CEST) :::::Ok, the "it flies over your head" is probably over the line, but I still say the other is not a personal attack. He said it wouldn't be effective since you'll kill too much of your team, which I already cited how to avoid on the build page. So I responded, "If you don't have the skill to use it effectively"....I.E: Use it how I said and it works. If you CAN'T do that, then it won't. If he wants to say that's a personal attack, then well...if the shoe fits... — ( \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 22:01, 7 October 2007 (CEST) FYI Build talk:Rt/N Explosive Creation#Outdated -- Armond Warblade 10:03, 8 October 2007 (CEST) :ZOMG! O.O Thank you. I totally wasn't expecting that. I dont' even know what to say. I'm shocked. — ( \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 10:07, 8 October 2007 (CEST) PvX:NPA Do not continue calling people stupid, jackasses, bad at the game, etc. Further offenses will result in a ban. --[[User:Edru_viransu|'Edru viransu']]//[[User_talk:Edru_viransu|'QQ about me']]/sysop 23:39, 8 October 2007 (CEST) :I didn't. I don't recall calling him stupid, though I may have said an arguement was stupid. There IS a difference. Also, he said I was bad at the game, not vice versa. I hope he got a warning as well. — ( \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 23:43, 8 October 2007 (CEST) ::Also, you may want to hand out warnings to Internet LOL and Rapta for name-calling (troll) on this page as well. — ( \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 23:43, 8 October 2007 (CEST) :::Incidentally I said you was acting like a jackass, not that he was one. I don't know him personally (can't say that I care to, either), I don't know if he is a jackass. — ( \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 23:48, 8 October 2007 (CEST) ::::"Stop being a jackass." How is that not calling Rapta a jackass? Stop NPAing. --[[User:Edru_viransu|'Edru viransu']]//[[User_talk:Edru_viransu|'QQ about me']]/sysop 23:53, 8 October 2007 (CEST) :::::"Stop NPA'ing" Does that mean I'm an NPA? No. How about we just chalk this up to the usual response here, "I'm just really blunt!" :) :::::Any way I can get him warned for harassment, as he's following me all over wiki starting arguements in every discussion I'm involved in? I'm just trying to defend myself. — ( \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 23:58, 8 October 2007 (CEST) :::::: You can just ignore him, hes not actually doing anything worth noting. most of the stuff is just over builds that dont meet the well requirement. Alpha fireborn 00:51, 9 October 2007 (CEST) :::::::I still think the fact that after being involved in a discussion-turned-arguement with me on Skakid's page he went and found all my builds and slammed and flamed them all is suspicious. In any other case, I'd be more inclined to heed statements pointing to my builds being bad, or my comments being wrong or stupid, but the circumstances here point more towards trolling and harassment than genuine contribution. That is the whole reason I take such offense to it. — ( \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 01:03, 9 October 2007 (CEST) (indent reset) look, i can argue this as much as you want, but all your builds are gimmicky and fail under the well policy. its the job of the wiki as a whole to shoot down these types of builds before they take up too much time, effort, and space. Alpha fireborn 01:05, 9 October 2007 (CEST) :I'd be more inclined to believe that as a motivation under pretty much any circumstance besides this one. — ( \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 01:09, 9 October 2007 (CEST) ::Whether or not you agree with it, a policy is a policy. If you don't like it, bring it up on the policy's talk page. Personally, I'm unsure if either of you have stepped across the bounds, but Edru has warned you. -- Armond Warblade 08:31, 9 October 2007 (CEST) :::Now now, let's just kiss and make up. [[User:Mgrinshpon|'—ǥrɩɳsɧ']][[User talk:Mgrinshpon|'ƿoɲ']] 13:06, 9 October 2007 (CEST) ::::/hug Tomoko 15:58, 9 October 2007 (CEST) :::::I don't disagree with the policy, I actually think disallowing personal jabs is a pretty good thing, though, if that extends to ANY disparaging remark towards a line of discussion, build, or attitude, that should be stated in the policy, and it should be enforced BEFORE the situation gets wholy out-of-hand like this one did (which I'll shoulder some of the blame for). :::::The way I understand a personal attack is something like, "Don't listen to that user, he's a retard." Or, "Get this build off wiki you idiot piece of white-trash." Jabs specifically at the user, not at the discussion. I kind of thought things like, "Well, that's a dumb idea." or "That sounded really pretentious" were not quite the same thing. If those are covered under the same policy, it should be listed on the policy. — ( \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 17:33, 9 October 2007 (CEST) Build:P/E Frosty Trident Could you please reconsider your rating of my build? I mean, as far as skill synergy goes, how does Anthem of Flame + Steam not have synergy? Conjure Frost + IAS from Aggressive Refrain also improve overall DPS greatly. That comment about energy problems... check out this build Build:P/Me Expel Paragon, then tell me if this build has energy problems. If you would've tested this build, you would've found that Water Trident does not need to be spammed. I urge you to read the discussion before rating the build. How this Paragon can possible have energy problems is beyond me. Also, do you know what innovation means? I'm not trying to bash on you, but I feel your rating was simply ridiculous. Shogunshen 03:45, 11 October 2007 (CEST) :There are several people with similar ratings and reasons up already and the discussion wasn't that positive, either. As for innovation, I know what it means. It means a new or different approach towards an existing or upcoming goal or problem. This doesn't really seem to fulfill those requirements. — ( \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 03:58, 11 October 2007 (CEST) ::No, it doesn't, it means something you rate according to the rest of the rating because you shouldn't be rating builds based on innovation at all. >.> -- Armond Warblade 07:43, 11 October 2007 (CEST) :::Bwuh? — ( \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 08:45, 11 October 2007 (CEST) ::::I dislike the innovation score having a weight in the vetting. -- Armond Warblade 08:51, 11 October 2007 (CEST) :::::I think the innovation score is good for 2 reasons. :::::#Innovative builds are less likely to be expected and meta'd against. :::::#I still play GW for fun, and innovative builds (that are effective) are generally more fun than builds that I've seen 100 times already. :::::— ( \ ʇ ) uɐɥʇıǝɹ 17:32, 11 October 2007 (CEST) I deleted User:Reithan/W/Mo Holy Hammer as per PvX:Redirect. -- Wizardboy777(T/ /Sysop) 02:48, 30 October 2007 (CET) Rt/Mo OoS Smiting Prayers Ritualist :Please change your rating now that the build has been changed. [[User:Beast194|'''Beast]]194''' 19:51, 1 November 2007 (CET)